Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="UcMiami, post: 1798010, member: 199"] We are getting into semantics I guess, but any 'protest' by it's very nature is being 'disrespectful' to the thing being protested. In that way you are correct. But the choice of making a quiet simple gesture as the form of protest of the playing of the national anthem is not detracting from anyone else's ability to experience of that and to perform their own honoring ritual. Those that are protesting in this manner are not interfering with the process, nor demanding that others join them, or trying to disrupt the anthem. The starkest contrast would before example the actions of the Westboro Church protests, whose whole idea is to interfere and disrupt other people's rituals. And the protestors against the protest of the anthem are the ones trying to impose their ideas of ritual on the protestors. And doing so frequently in quite vile ways. It is like the fire and brimstone preachers condemning other faiths/no faith to hell for not participating in their rituals And while it was an interesting choice by the Washington Spirit, the action they chose to take actually deprived the athletes and late arriving fans of their chance to experience a time honored ritual that the vast majority would have respected. In order to prevent a quiet protest by one athlete, they in effect changed and diminished the ritual they were trying to protect. In that way, I would say Rapinoe 'won'. One reason for playing of the anthem before athletic events is to take a moment before competition to acknowledge the togetherness of all involved - that while the competition may be fierce, it is still 'friendly', and in this way it is a bookend with the sharing of hands at the conclusion of the competition. Remove the athletes from the ritual and it loses some of its meaning. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach